Automated summary
Executes implementation plans with two-stage review, verification, and batch checkpoints.
Strengths
- Systematic approach to executing multiple tasks
- Two-stage review (spec compliance then code quality) before validation
- Regular checkpoints for user feedback
- Supports parallel execution via subagents for independent tasks
Limitations
- Requires a well-defined plan in docs/plans/
- Can be slow for very large plans without manual parallelization
- Depends on ability to run verification commands (tests, lint, build)
Use this skill when working with a structured implementation plan and you need to execute multiple tasks reliably.
Avoid using it for simple or ad-hoc changes that don't require a formal plan.
Security analysis
SafeThis skill defines a systematic workflow for executing implementation plans using an AI agent's own toolset (Task, subagents) and does not instruct or perform any destructive, exfiltrating, or external command execution. It focuses on verification, review, and checkpointing with no security risks.
No concerns found
How this analysis is madeExamples
Execute task 3 from docs/plans/database-migration.mdRun the next 3 independent tasks from the plan and wait for my feedbackExecute the entire plan at docs/plans/feature-auth.md step by step, reporting after each taskname: plan-executor description: Execute implementation plans created by /discover. Use this skill when working in a worktree with a --plan flag, when you need to execute tasks from a docs/plans/*.md file, or when implementing a multi-task feature systematically.
Plan Executor
Execute implementation plans with two-stage review, verification, and batch checkpoints.
When This Skill Applies
This skill automatically applies when:
- You're in a worktree created with
--planflag - Your goal references a plan file at
docs/plans/... - You're executing a multi-task implementation
Core Principles
- Evidence before claims - Never claim completion without verification output
- Two-stage review - Spec compliance first, then code quality
- Batch execution - Execute 3 tasks, checkpoint, continue
- Fresh context per task - For parallel execution, use separate subagents
Execution Flow
Phase 1: Load and Review Plan
1. Read the plan file completely
2. Extract all tasks with their:
- Files to create/modify
- Steps to follow
- Verification commands
- Dependencies
3. Create mental model of dependency graph
4. Identify independent vs dependent tasks
5. If concerns about the plan, raise with user BEFORE starting
Phase 2: Execute Tasks
For 1-3 tasks: Execute sequentially yourself For 4+ independent tasks: Consider parallel subagents
Per Task Execution
1. Mark task as in_progress (use TaskUpdate)
2. Follow each step exactly as written
3. Run verification commands, capture output
4. Perform two-stage review (see below)
5. Mark task as completed only with evidence
6. Commit the work
Phase 3: Batch Checkpoints
After every 3 tasks (or all independent tasks):
Report to user:
- Tasks completed with evidence
- Issues encountered
- "Ready for feedback"
Wait for user confirmation before continuing.
Phase 4: Dependent Tasks
After independent tasks complete:
- Identify newly unblocked tasks
- Execute next batch
- Repeat until all tasks done
Two-Stage Review
Stage 1: Spec Compliance Review
Question: Does the code match the plan exactly?
Check:
- [ ] All required files created at exact paths
- [ ] All modifications match spec
- [ ] Nothing missing from requirements
- [ ] Nothing extra added (YAGNI)
- [ ] Tests cover specified behaviors
If issues found:
- Fix the gaps
- Re-review
- Don't proceed until spec-compliant
Stage 2: Code Quality Review
Question: Is the implementation well-built?
Check:
- [ ] Code follows project patterns
- [ ] Tests are meaningful (not just coverage)
- [ ] No obvious bugs or edge cases missed
- [ ] Error handling appropriate
- [ ] No code smells
If issues found:
- Fix the issues
- Re-review
- Don't proceed until quality approved
Verification Before Completion
The Iron Law
NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE
Required Evidence
| Claim | Required Evidence |
| ---------------- | -------------------------------- |
| "Tests pass" | Actual test output: X/Y pass |
| "Build succeeds" | Build output: exit code 0 |
| "Linter clean" | Linter output: 0 errors |
| "Task complete" | All verification commands output |
Bad vs Good
❌ BAD: "The tests should pass now"
❌ BAD: "I believe this is working"
❌ BAD: "Task completed successfully"
✅ GOOD: "Tests pass (output: 12/12 pass, 0 failures)"
✅ GOOD: "Build succeeded (exit code 0, no errors)"
✅ GOOD: "Task complete. Evidence:
- Tests: 12/12 pass
- Lint: 0 errors
- Build: success"
When to Verify
- Before claiming any task is done
- Before moving to next task
- Before reporting to user
- Before committing
Parallel Execution with Subagents
When you have 4+ independent tasks, use parallel subagents:
Launching Subagents
// Launch multiple Task tools in a SINGLE message
Task({
description: 'Implement Task 1',
prompt: `You are implementing Task 1 from the plan.
Task details:
${task1Content}
Requirements:
1. Follow each step exactly
2. Run all verification commands
3. Report actual output, not assumptions
4. Commit when complete
When done, report:
- Files created/modified
- Verification output (actual)
- Any issues encountered`,
subagent_type: 'general-purpose',
});
// In the SAME message, launch Task 2, 3, etc.
Collecting Results
After subagents complete:
- Review each result
- Verify the evidence provided
- If subagent claimed success without evidence, re-verify yourself
- Report consolidated results to user
Don't Trust Blindly
❌ Subagent: "Task completed successfully"
You: "Great, moving on"
✅ Subagent: "Task completed. Tests: 5/5 pass"
You: [Verify the claim by running tests yourself if suspicious]
You: "Confirmed, Task 1 complete with 5/5 tests passing"
When to Stop and Ask
STOP immediately when:
- Verification fails repeatedly
- Plan has gaps or unclear instructions
- Dependencies aren't actually met
- You're unsure about an approach
Don't:
- Guess when confused
- Force through blockers
- Skip verification
- Proceed with failing tests
Example Execution
Agent: I'm executing the plan at docs/plans/2026-02-01-webhooks.md
[Reads plan, extracts 5 tasks]
Task 1 (independent): WebhookConfig model
Task 2 (independent): WebhookDelivery service
Task 3 (independent): API endpoints
Task 4 (depends on 1,2): Integration
Task 5 (depends on 4): E2E tests
Starting with independent tasks 1-3...
---
Task 1: WebhookConfig model
[Following steps from plan]
1. Writing failing test...
2. Running: pnpm test packages/core --grep WebhookConfig
Output: FAIL - WebhookConfig is not defined
3. Creating model...
4. Running: pnpm test packages/core --grep WebhookConfig
Output: PASS - 3/3 tests pass
Spec compliance review:
✅ All files created at specified paths
✅ Model matches spec
✅ Tests cover required behaviors
✅ Nothing extra added
Code quality review:
✅ Follows project patterns
✅ Tests are meaningful
✅ No obvious issues
Task 1 complete.
Evidence: Tests pass (3/3), files created at packages/core/src/models/webhook-config.ts
[Commit: "feat: add WebhookConfig model"]
---
[Similar for Tasks 2, 3]
---
Batch checkpoint: Tasks 1-3 complete
Summary:
- Task 1: WebhookConfig model ✅ (3/3 tests)
- Task 2: WebhookDelivery service ✅ (5/5 tests)
- Task 3: API endpoints ✅ (4/4 tests)
All independent tasks verified and committed.
Ready for feedback. Should I proceed with Task 4 (Integration)?
Integration with Workflow
/discover (main branch)
│
├── Creates plan at docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-feature.md
│
└── Creates worktree with --plan flag
│
└── plan-executor (this skill)
│
├── Execute tasks with verification
├── Two-stage review
├── Batch checkpoints
│
└── Complete with evidence
Anti-Patterns
Don't:
- Claim completion without running verification
- Trust subagent "success" reports blindly
- Skip spec compliance review
- Move to next task with failing tests
- Guess when plan is unclear
- Add features not in the plan (YAGNI)
Do:
- Run every verification command
- Capture and report actual output
- Stop when blocked
- Ask for clarification when needed
- Follow the plan exactly
From the file to a first result
The download contains exactly the content displayed on this page. This copy may differ from the latest version in the source repository.
View the source and supporting filesThis download contains SKILL.md only. Any scripts, references, templates and dependencies are not included. Get the required files from the source, preserving their directory structure, before continuing.
1. Download the file
Download SKILL.mdFrom the root of a test project, save the file as .skill-downloads/plan-executor-mm78nmjo/SKILL.md, or use the command below. This folder is for inspecting the skill before installation.
Command for macOS/Linux or WSL: requires a POSIX shell and curl. On Windows without WSL, use the download button and create the folder manually.
mkdir -p '.skill-downloads/plan-executor-mm78nmjo' && curl --fail --show-error --location 'https://skills-guides.com/api/skills/plan-executor-mm78nmjo/download' --output '.skill-downloads/plan-executor-mm78nmjo/SKILL.md.part' && mv '.skill-downloads/plan-executor-mm78nmjo/SKILL.md.part' '.skill-downloads/plan-executor-mm78nmjo/SKILL.md'2. Check prerequisites
Read SKILL.md before using it. If it references scripts or external services, inspect them and prepare the required access in your test environment.
No recognized prerequisites section in this file. This does not mean it is self-contained: libraries, tools and access requirements may be mentioned elsewhere in the content or source repository.
The platforms on this page are catalog indications. The paths below follow tool documentation; they do not prove this skill has been run in those tools. No minimum tool version is confirmed for this listing.
3. Load the skill
After inspection, copy the complete folder into your project using one of the commands below, then open a new tool session. The command stops if a folder with the same name already exists: compare the files before replacing it.
Claude Code
test -f '.skill-downloads/plan-executor-mm78nmjo/SKILL.md' && test -s '.skill-downloads/plan-executor-mm78nmjo/SKILL.md' && mkdir -p '.claude/skills' && test ! -e '.claude/skills/plan-executor' && cp -R '.skill-downloads/plan-executor-mm78nmjo' '.claude/skills/plan-executor'OpenSkills
OpenSkills must already be installed. The local install/read procedure is checked with OpenSkills 1.5.0, which requires Node.js ≥ 20.6.0. Catalog slugs are not resolved automatically.
Official OpenSkills installationopenskills install './.skill-downloads/plan-executor-mm78nmjo'openskills read 'plan-executor-mm78nmjo'Reading should display the installed file content and its base directory. It does not run the skill or install its dependencies.
For an agent that reads AGENTS.md, then sync the index. This command changes AGENTS.md: review the diff before using it.
openskills syncManual method or another tool: attach SKILL.md to a conversation, or open it in an agent that can read files. Include any required supporting resources. No universal folder is recognized by every tool.
4. Try a first task
Use a short, synthetic input: an API endpoint, a small document or an interface brief. In a new conversation, attach the file or give the agent its path, then adapt this request:
Read .skill-downloads/plan-executor-mm78nmjo/SKILL.md and apply its instructions to this example: [describe a test input]. Identify any missing files, dependencies or access. Produce the result requested by the skill without inventing data or running unreviewed scripts.Expected result: output matching the skill instructions, or a precise list of missing prerequisites. A read confirmation alone does not validate a first use. If an external resource is unavailable, that path remains untested.
React Hook Form Best Practices
Development
Master React Hook Form: avoid anti-patterns, manage subscriptions, and handle reset, dirty state, and controlled inputs correctly.
Emotion to Mantine Migration
Development
Migrate Emotion styled-components to Mantine components with style props and CSS modules. Use when converting .styled.tsx files or removing @emotion imports.
Scope Creep Detector
Development
Analyzes git diffs against a stated intent to detect scope creep, unrelated files, broad PRs, and oversized changes, then suggests keep, split, or justify actions.